1eyedking Top 10 things that RPGs don't do anymore

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[IncendiaryDevice]

I've played two games that have had ridiculously short timers to complete some small task and represented an end-game scenario, both of which were games I was up until then enjoying.

Out of curiosity ... what two games were these? What happened?

Sure. They're burned into my memory, so I'll have little trouble remembering. The first is one I've posted about here before on a thread and even had someone else who played it agree it was one of the stupidest puzzles in Adventure gaming:



^ this guy is the king expert on Nancy Drew and he used the cheat, a cheat you'd never get without looking it up or being really lucky. It says something about game development when the devs put in a cheat but don't fix the puzzle.



^ Some people are good at these kind of challenges, others are not, this guy was surprised he did so well, ending the level nearly dead. I tried about 20 times and had to give up the game. Its mission 12/24 so right in the middle of the game and, aside from the turret levels (4 in total), a very entertaining squad-based game. Well, thanks for ruining that game turret-level designer whoever you were, really feeling the squad-based fun sitting alone in a turret with an arbitrary timer clocking me.

 

[ilitarist]

So that's where real hardcore gaming left. That's the series that hasn't succumbed to casuals and market. Nancy Drew.

 

[Jaesun]

I guess what I'm saying is that they can still make games with these features it's just that they destroy them due to handholding and streamlining, the need to have quantaty over quality, "awesome" cinematics, which wreck intresting dialogue decisions and the lack of a quest fail state.

That's too confusing for console kids, of which, all these games are the primary demographic. So why add such complexity? That doesn't sell more games.

 

[Zboj Lamignat]

1. Having doom guy-like animated character portraits that show wounds, status effects etc. Bonus points for characters commenting on stuff that's happening around them.
2. Proper, nice looking paper dolls.
3. I know that's wishful thinking, but it would be so good to see a handsome, high production value 2d crpg. At least stop using the wow-like or prosperian turd golem quality level 3d please.
4. Being funny. That one's a bit controversial, but F1/2 for example had quite a few genuinely funny dialogues, where player could act all smartass to further escalate things with npcs. The last game with some funny dialogues I remember was Risen (some of the pickpocket dialogues).
5. Avoid adding mechanics and content to cross things off a checklist when you obviously have no idea/talent/budget to make it work. Crafting would be the most obvious example. But most crowdfunded "old-school" rpgs seem to be literally made of stuff like that.
6. Good itemization. That one is both vague and kinda obvious, but really, what was the last game with really good itemization? Getting you really excited about finding a well-earned relic, planning characters around certain item(s) and so on?

 

[ilitarist]

2. Proper, nice looking paper dolls.
4. Being funny. That one's a bit controversial, but F1/2 for example had quite a few genuinely funny dialogues, where player could act all smartass to further escalate things with npcs. The last game with some funny dialogues I remember was Risen (some of the pickpocket dialogues).

Dragon Age series does all of it. In fact, it's too much playing dolls and every character is a smartass.

6. Good itemization. That one is both vague and kinda obvious, but really, what was the last game with really good itemization? Getting you really excited about finding a well-earned relic, planning characters around certain item(s) and so on?

I wouldn't like planning characters around specific items as it implies foreknowledge - unless you mean type of equipment. Anyway, Pillars of Eternity had it, especially in expansions.

 

[flabbyjack]

I gave this a lot of thought, and came up with my #1 thing that RPGs don't let you do anymore...

Spoiler

Let you name your save-games. I have dozens of save-games in Deus Ex: Mankind Divided, and they are all named 'Save Game'... other RPGs simply name the game as per the current area, or the current time. In most -good- RPGs you can name your savegame such as BGII's 'Slaying the DemiLich Phase 2' or 'Stronghold Quest Start'

 

[bminorkey]

what we need more of are rpgs that react to you when you do something that's at face value supposed to be game-breaking or just really weird. like killing lord british/casting armaggedon in ult7. there are some recent examples of this:

1. killing 4kings before getting the lord vessel in dark souls

2. genocide route in undertale

but they are far and few in-between

 

[IncendiaryDevice]

So that's where real hardcore gaming left. That's the series that hasn't succumbed to casuals and market. Nancy Drew.

I acknowledge the jest in what you say and also the truth. That Nancy Drew has maintained concurrence for 19 years and produced 31 games in that time and still has more to come flies in the face of so many excuses we hear day after day on the codex as to why our beloved studios can't make decent games and why its so hard for indies to do the same. Vogel's Spiderweb studios is proof that such a thing would have been viable for an RPG developer over the same time period.

I wont rehash all the excuses we've all heard, from the money men to the development teams to the fanboys, but the critical moment IMO was Bioware's sudden redirection towards the console market. In 2003 they were having perfectly acceptable success with both Neverwinter Nights and Knights of the Old Republic, but suddenly, as if someone in the company had a dream, everything just went dead. Nothing was heard from them for the entirety of 2004, after a ceaseless 6 years of providing more than one new product a year. Were they planning something huge? Nope, in 2005 the big wait ended with the release of... Jade Empire, some console aRPG. Not because the PC games weren't making money, but because they thought they could make more money making console games. You know, for dick measuring competitions at conventions.

But what was happening in the real world while the greed infection stalked Bioware towers? People were making Neverwinter Nights mods. Thousands of them. Some of them were even quite good. And people were still making them and circulating them throughout the 10 years after Bioware ceased making NWN content. The NWN OC might have been a can of ballsacks, but the expansions are quite widely loved, as are many of the better fan-made mods and there's no evidence at all to suggest that Bioware couldn't have continued making NWN games for the duration of the 2000s, be the Nancy Drews of RPGs.

There is, of course, the issue of the problem of D&D licencing, but most things in life can be worked around if the determination and time is there, and let us not forget, the whole of 2004-2006 brought nothing of value until they finally cracked the console market with Mass Effect. Even if you argue "I'd rather have Mass Effect than 10 years of NWN", which might be a valid claim for your tastes, then you're still not benefiting from investing in following Bioware because 3 years later and $860m is something no human with a primary desire for money can refuse when EA comes knocking (your beloved gameplay down).

The very same issue we have today is the same issue we had back in 2005, why, exactly, is no-one willing to test-out making 'normal' profits from a stable cRPG franchise? Why has it been left to independents to fill this void?

 

[laclongquan]

VD made a point about sequels sell worse with every tittle, that's why most studios doesnt try to prolong series.
The counterpoint of Spiderweb's series dont make much headway because I frankly doesnt like that series. Also, Nancy Drew here is the first I ever heard of that kind of game.

Of course, this fly in the face of Resident Evils series with basically same gameplay, Tomb Raiders, Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest...

Honestly, the averse of western studios to follow tried and true products of THEIR OWN making is quite baffling.

 

[IncendiaryDevice]

VD made a point about sequels sell worse with every tittle, that's why most studios doesnt try to prolong series.
The counterpoint of Spiderweb's series dont make much headway because I frankly doesnt like that series. Also, Nancy Drew here is the first I ever heard of that kind of game.

Of course, this fly in the face of Resident Evils series with basically same gameplay, Tomb Raiders, Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest...

Honestly, the averse of western studios to follow tried and true products of THEIR OWN making is quite baffling.

Total War is another, Civilisation, Paradox games, Football Manager - it is indeed baffling, more so because basic business management is normally to keep recycling the same thing over and over, no matter the industry. Its even more baffling because RPG is the most popular gaming format when done right/get lucky. I'm not sure I'd take Vault Dweller 's word as gospel, even if he's right, because a decent profit still makes for a worthwhile venture, even if its not as big as a previous profit, this is the kind of statement I categorise as 'common excuses' above. You're supposed to keep going with something until the well is dry, not stop after a few bucketfulls because you predict there'll be no more rain for the next year. Whether you like Spiderweb is just subjective, virtually all the criticim towards his games is that they lack that extra bit of polish which can only come from a budget and a team.

 

[Vault Dweller]

VD made a point about sequels sell worse with every tittle, that's why most studios doesnt try to prolong series.

I was talking about non-AAA games, warning indie developers not to follow the AAA studios' footsteps blindly.

 

[laclongquan]

And it's western RPG developers. Russians' Nival made Silent Storm, expand it with Sentinels, and Hammer & Sickle. The Space Ranger' studio also properly follow up its game with sequels and expansions.

 

[octavius]

I wont rehash all the excuses we've all heard, from the money men to the development teams to the fanboys, but the critical moment IMO was Bioware's sudden redirection towards the console market. In 2003 they were having perfectly acceptable success with both Neverwinter Nights and Knights of the Old Republic, but suddenly, as if someone in the company had a dream, everything just went dead. Nothing was heard from them for the entirety of 2004, after a ceaseless 6 years of providing more than one new product a year. Were they planning something huge?

I wonder if it coincided with Ray "monetization" Myzuka attending Business School?

 

[naossano]

RPG that could entirelly be played with the mouse if you wanted to.

RPG that had lore friendly inventory in which you could actually SEE your items.

If maight be wrong but i tend to see a trend in modern RPG in which they try to give you as much informations and wonders as early as possible, so you think the game will still be good, while the later parts end up underwhelming. I prefer games that do the opposite, slowly seducing you, then blow your mind when you reach later content. I am thinking about Fallout 1 and Shadowrun Dragonfall. The early parts were between okay and good, but the later parts really gave you an impression that will never leave your memory.

 

[Zboj Lamignat]

RPG that could entirelly be played with the mouse if you wanted to.

Why would you want that?

 

[ERYFKRAD]

RPG that could entirelly be played with the mouse if you wanted to.

Why would you want that?

Bros like mindx2 oughta have fun too.

 

[mindx2]

RPG that could entirelly be played with the mouse if you wanted to.

Why would you want that?

Bros like mindx2 oughta have fun too.

Started on a keyboard only though and have fond memories of those days as well. Just give me a well designed game and I'll find a way to play it...

 

[Zombra]

RPG that could entirelly be played with the mouse if you wanted to.

And the flip side ... games that could be played with just the keyboard.

 

[naossano]

RPG that could entirelly be played with the mouse if you wanted to.

Why would you want that?

Access to the controls through the in-game interface, not through a bunch of button of an external device like a keyboard or a gamepad. You stay more in the game, and less into those devices. That's is quite subjective, but I feel more distracted from the experience, the more I have to focus on things that aren't within the game.

 

[Barnabas]

I'm tired of quest markers and trails. Just give me general directions in a slightly confusing manner. Also no more fast travel. Give me a means of transportation. OR give me a lift to the general area if its not a main landmark. I don't care if its optional, if I don't want to do it, then I don't want anyone doing it.

 

[anvi]

^ the problem with that is that it forces you to read the dialogue, and usually the dialogue in games is horrific.

 

[Barnabas]

Only in jrpgs

 

[anvi]

I hate it in every game ever made. The only one that was 'ok', was Witcher 3, but sadly I don't like the gameplay in that game.

 

[Mikeal]

Non retard persuasion system. In 90% of games it's look like:
Entrance to headquarter of secret evil organization.
Hero: [Persuasion on required level check - sucess] I'm a talking pancake. Talking pancakes are allowed to enter your base, right?
Bad guy: Sure thing bro, come in. Damm I've never seen a talking pancake. Got to tell my kids about you.
Hero: Thanks man, see ya.

I really miss model from Arcanum. Sure you have Persuasion skill, but you have to choose right answer to make your bullshit believable and have some knowledge about game setting. Convincing Loghair to end his exile and join your party or beating Kerghan in argument battle is something very satisfying.

BTW. I'm new here so hi everybody.

BTW 2. Who is prosper?